Potential of Treaty deserves a hearing

By Senator the Hon Rod Kemp, Assistant Treasurer, Victoria, Liberal Party of Australia
9 February 1998

Debate on foreign investment is vital, but must be more balanced
says Rod Kemp

There were alarmist views about the proposed Multilateral
Agreement on Investment (MAI) on The Age opinion page last
Thursday, including the suggestion that an MAI poses a threat to
Australia's democracy.

Pauline Hanson and the leader of the Democrats, Senator Meg
Lees, have also claimed MAI negotiations are being conducted in
secret and that the Government's ability to attach conditions to
foreign investment is in jeopardy. It is important that
misinformation about the MAI is corrected.

The Government's position on the MAI, or any other treaty, is
clear. We will not sign the MAI unless it is demonstrably in
Australia's national interest. Our national interest encompasses the
interests of the community as a whole - not just the interests of
large firms.

Negotiations for this treaty began under the former Labor
Government in 1995 and are continuing. The Howard Government
has not committed itself to signing the treaty. Our commitment to
continuing the negotiations is based on the potential benefits the
treaty could bring to Australia.

The aim of the MAI is to provide a strong and comprehensive
framework for international investment. The MAI would provide
investors with greater certainty as to the 'rules of the game' when
investing in foreign countries.

Investment helps to stimulate the economy, bringing benefits from
the creation of jobs, from higher income and from new technology.

A major benefit in the treaty is that it would help Australian
companies gain greater access to foreign markets. Also, existing
and future Australian investments would be more secure because of
the legal protection offered by the MAI.

Joining the MAI would not endanger Australia's existing laws and
policies. While the proposed MAI generally requires foreign
investors to be treated no less favorably than domestic investors, it
will be possible for countries to make exceptions where they want
to impose more stringent requirements on foreign investors than on
domestic investors.

Australia will create whatever exceptions are required to protect our
laws and policies, including immigration, foreign investment
(including the media and real estate) and Government grants and
subsidies.

Likewise, Australia will be able to protect its environmental and
labor standards, Australian content in programming, the sale of
public assets, fishing rights and the affairs of our indigenous
people.

There have been many claims that these negotiations have
progressed in secret. There is nothing secretive about the
negotiations or the MAI. Australia's participation in the
negotiations was announced at the outset.

Unlike the previous Labor Government, the coalition Government
has put in place a rigorous treaty-making process which will ensure
that binding action is not taken on the treaty until it has been
subjected to proper parliamentary and public scrutiny.

The Government has also actively consulted, and continues to
consult, the states, industry organisations and other interested non-
government organisations about the details and implications of the
MAI.

It is also hypocritical of the Democrats, who often support
Australia signing treaties supporting their own narrow interests at
the expense of the broader community, to claim that Australia is
'signing away its sovereignty' with the MAI.

The Democrats wanted the Government to sign the greenhouse
emissions treaty proposed by the European Union which, at that
stage, would have required Australian industry to carry an unfair
burden and would have cost tens of thousands of Australians their
jobs.

An appropriately negotiated MAI will create jobs and promote
national prosperity.

This Government welcomes interest in, and debate on, the MAI.
But it is in the interests of all Australians that the debate be
balanced and informed.